Chicago’s Junk Lawsuit Against Glock

Chicago has a gang violence problem. That in and of itself is nothing new nor is their unwillingness to actually do something about cracking down on gangs. Now it appears that one of the weapons of choice of violent criminals is the auto-sear equipped Glock handgun.

True or not, the City of Chicago has decided that one way to stop their proliferation is to file a lawsuit. Given many of these “Glock switches” are being smuggled into the US from the People’s Republic of China, it would be logical to file that lawsuit against the Chinese exporters of these illegal auto-sears. Of course, logic has nothing to do with politically motivated lawsuits. Thus, it should not be surprising that Chicago is now suing Glock in Cook County Circuit Court. Nor would you be surprised to learn that Chicago is being assisted in their lawsuit by Everytown Law.

According to the Chicago Tribune, the Chicago Police Department has recovered over 1,100 Glock pistols equipped with the auto-sear in the last two years. The complaint alleges, “These terrifying weapons have caused death and destruction throughout Chicago: they have been recovered in connection with homicides, aggravated assaults, batteries, kidnappings, burglaries, home invasions, carjackings, and attempted robberies.” One must wonder how many of the criminals found with these auto-sear equipped Glocks were Federally prosecuted for violation of the National Firearms Act of 1934. Undoubtedly, none of these firearms were made before the introduction of the Hughes Amendment in 1986.

The lawsuit is based upon the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act and the City of Chicago Municipal Code Section 2-25-090(a), which prohibits any person from engaging in “any conduct constituting an unlawful act or practice under the [ICFA].” The ICFA was amended in 2023 by the Illinois General Assembly to add firearms to the law.

The lawsuit accuses Glock of knowingly producing pistols, especially those from Gen 1 to Gen 4, that were easy to modify. Glock is also accused of refusing to modify their pistols and of failing to enforce their trademark as many of the auto-sears are marked with the Glock trademarked logo.

By choosing to continue selling and marketing its easily modified pistols to Illinois civilians, including to Chicago non-law-enforcement consumers, and refusing to implement simple changes to its pistol design, Glock has violated numerous obligations under municipal and state law, including by failing to institute reasonable controls and safeguards to prevent the unlawful possession of its pistols, “[k]nowingly creat[ing], maintain[ing], or contribut[ing] to a condition in Illinois that endangers the safety or health of the public by conduct either unlawful in itself or unreasonable under all circumstances,” and engaging in unfair acts.

The lawsuit is filled with hyperbole as the Chicago and Everytown attorneys play to the press.

Here is an example:

Glock continues to sell handguns that are easily modifiable because the demand from the criminal market for Glocks, which can be made into a fully automatic machine gun easily in combination with an auto sear, boosts Glock’s sales and profits. Glock has known for years that criminals, including those who seek to be armed and to inflict violence with outlawed machine guns, are a considerable source of demand and therefore revenue and profit for Glock. Glock further knows that it would sell fewer of its pistols if it lost its consumers who specifically seek out Glocks over other models because of their ease of convertibility to a machine gun.

Even worse, rappers such as Drake, 21 Savage, and Chicago’s own PGF Nuk have created songs that refer to the Glock switch and are even shown in videos holding Glocks equipped with the illegal auto-sear! Oh, my!

The lawsuit accuses Glock of violating the law by a) engaging in the unreasonable sale and marketing of firearms, b) engaging in an unfair practice under the ICFA, c) contributing to a condition that endangers “the health and safety of the public”, d) creating a public nuisance, and e) negligence.

The city is asking for an injunction, an order that Glock take steps to prevent their firearms from being sold where Chicago residents could purchase them, fines, and monetary damages to compensate the city for its costs.

From what I can tell, Glock has not issued a response yet. If I were an attorney for Glock, I would be pushing to have this lawsuit dismissed under the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act and moved to Federal court.

The full complaint is below.

2024CH02216-File-Stamped-Complaint-Glock

Questions On Law School’s Gun Violence Prevention Clinic

The University of Minnesota Law School proudly announced the creation of a “Gun Violence Prevention Clinic”. The announcement on December 8th states their belief that it is first for US law schools and it will be headed by Everytown Law alumna Megan Walsh. Walsh is currently a Visiting Assistant Clinical Professor of Law at the school.

https://law.umn.edu/profiles/megan-walsh

From the announcement on the clinic’s role:

The clinic will utilize student pro bono legal work to support and litigate cases that help reduce injuries, deaths, and trauma resulting from gun violence. A three-year pilot project, the clinic seeks to spur law school and law student engagement in firearms law and the Second Amendment; establish a home for gun violence prevention litigation in the Great Lakes area; and grow the pool of litigation expertise and legal resources available for Second Amendment and gun violence prevention matters.  

Walsh amplifies on the pro bono work saying, “Litigation in this area is needed to challenge extreme gun laws, to combat the disproportionate effect of gun violence on BIPOC communities, and to provide a counterweight to the gun lobby in the courts.” It should be noted that not only did she work for Everytown but she served as the Moms Demand Action “BE Smart” lead for Minnesota. That program is their campaign on “responsible gun ownership.”

The law school dean, Garry W. Jenkins, calls this clinic “novel and exciting”. He goes to say it will help students develop “a deep reservoir of knowledge on Second Amendment jurisprudence.” Somehow I think that this knowledge will be one-sided.

The clinic will partner with the office of Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison (DFL-MN) on litigation.

The Gun Violence Prevention Clinic will partner with the Minnesota Attorney General’s Office on Second Amendment cases and on affirmative litigation brought by the Attorney General to reduce gun violence in Minnesota. This partnership will give students the opportunity to work with the Attorney General’s office to create safer communities in Minnesota through litigation, with the students serving as Special Assistant Attorney Generals under the supervision of the clinic.

Known funding for this clinic comes from the anti-gun Joyce Foundation and the McKnight Foundation ($300,000). The announcement refers to “other funders”. That leads to the first question in the list below.

Here are a list of questions that should be asked about the clinic.

  • Who are the other “funders” of the Gun Violence (sic) Prevention Clinic?
  • How much was given to the clinic by the Joyce Foundation? They don’t list the grant on their website.
  • Will the clinic be seeking appropriated money from the Minnesota Legislature? If so, how much?
  • How much of the Office of Attorney General’s budget will be devoted to this clinic?
  • How much appropriated money from the University of Minnesota be allocated to this clinic? Or, will it only be grant-supported?
  • Who approached whom to start this clinic?
  • What is the role of Everytown in this clinic?
  • Will the Brady Law Project and Giffords Law also be involved?
  • What does Walsh consider “extreme gun laws”?
  • Will the clinic be working with the US Attorney’s Office and BATFE to prosecute straw purchasers?
  • Will the clinic be promoting litigation to close gun stores?
  • Who will be paying for the anticipated amicus briefs filed in cases opposing the flood of litigation opened up by the Bruen decision?
  • Given Walsh is a graduate of Duke University School of Law, will the clinic be coordinating efforts with the Duke Center for Firearms Law?

The clinic goes live in January 2023. There will be many more questions that can be raised and that will need answers. In the meantime, I understand Minnesota has a fairly strong public records law and I intend to use it. If anyone in Minnesota wants to help with this, just leave a comment.

Tweet Of The Day

It seems that Everytown Law and the Brady United are trying to get the Federal Trade Commission to come down on Smith & Wesson for false advertising. You can read their letter here.

However, as Rob Romano of the Firearms Policy Coalition points out, their argument might backfire on them elsewhere. That said, neither Everytown nor Brady have any problem with hypocrisy.

Cities And Everytown Sue BATFE Over “Ghost Guns”

In a lawsuit supported by the Everytown Law, the cities of Syracuse, San Jose, Chicago, and Columbia, SC have sued the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives over 80% receivers. Of course, they characterize them as “ghost guns” and not semi-finished lumps of metal or polymer.

BATFE is accused of failing to follow the Gun Control Act of 1968.

From the lawsuit:

Defendants ATF and United States Department of Justice (“DOJ”) refuse to apply the clear terms of the Gun Control Act. That federal law defines regulated “firearms” to include not only operable weapons but also their core building blocks—frames for pistols, and receivers for long guns—so long as those core building blocks are designed to be or may be readily converted into operable weapons. See 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(3). Notwithstanding that statutory language, Defendants have declined to regulate unfinished ghost gun frames and receivers as “firearms,” even though they are designed to be and may be readily converted into
operable weapons.

Instead, Defendants have issued rules and letter determinations—continuing to this day—giving the green light to the unregulated sale of unfinished ghost gun frames and receivers.

The cities and Everytown are seeking an injunction and a declaratory relief in the Federal lawsuit brought in the Southern District of New York. They want any and all determination letters set aside.

The Everytown press release makes these assertions:

A ghost gun is a do-it-yourself, homemade gun made from easy-to-get, building blocks that are unregulated under the ATF’s current interpretation of federal law. These guns are finished by an individual, not a federally licensed manufacturer or importer. Ghost guns are one of the fastest-growing gun safety problems facing our country. 

The ATF’s current interpretation of federal law — which the lawsuit seeks to have set aside as unlawful — allows people who can’t legally own a firearm to easily buy the parts for a ghost gun. In only a few hours, these self-made weapons become fully functioning, untraceable firearms. A person can buy the parts and assemble a ghost gun without even receiving a background check

Research by Everytown shows ghost guns are becoming a weapon of choice for people with felony convictions, gun traffickers, and other people legally prohibited from owning guns. 

I call BS on the assertion that “ghost guns” are the weapon of choice of criminals. Stolen guns and guns obtained through illegal straw purchases are much more likely to be found in the hands of a criminal than a completed Glock-ish Polymer80.

Former BATFE technical expert Rick Vasquez had this to say in a Reuters report:

But Rick Vasquez, a Virginia-based firearms consultant and former ATF technical expert who evaluated guns and gun products to help the bureau determine if they were legal, said anyone wanting to address the proliferation of kit guns should pass new laws in Congress.

There is no word if Everytown Law intends to demand that the plumbing department of Lowes, Home Depot, and Menards now be required to have a FFL. As Tam has always said, they are selling 90% Sten guns.